Manoj Goswami v. State Of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And Another

orders would be passed in the case in first call.", this Court proceeded to hear the instant appeal.

3. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and Shri Badrul Hasan, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent.

4. The present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989 (in short "Act of 1989") against the impugned order dated 04.03.2025 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Ambedkar Nagar in Bail Application No. 245 of 2025 arising out of Case Crime No. 247 of 2024, under Sections 406, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3(2)V, 3(2)VA,(1)da, dha of Act of 1989, P.S. Alapur, 2 District - Ambedkar Nagar. CRLA No. 973 of 2025

5. Pressing the present appeal and impeaching the order, under appeal, dated 04.03.2025, it is stated that an amount to the tune of Rs. 3,50,000 was to be provided to the informant and in this regard a cheque dated 24.03.2018 of Rs. 1,80,000 was provided, which was bounced, and thereafter the FIR in issue was lodged on 26.10.2024 at Police Station - Alapur, District Ambedkar Nagar, registered as FIR No. 0247/2024, wherein various allegations have been levelled to attract offence under Sections 406, 419, 420, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3(1)da, dha and 3(2)(va) of Act of 1989. According to this FIR, the appellant duped respondent no.2 on the pretext of providing a service, and in this regard, a forged appointment letter was also provided by the appellant to the respondent no.2, which in fact is not correct, and the allegations levelled in the FIR are subject to the evidence adduced by the parties before the trial court.

6. It is stated that, in fact, to a commercial dispute, particularly a dispute related to a cheque which was bounced, has been converted into a criminal dispute by making various allegations, which practice has been deprecated by the Hon'ble Apex Court in various pronouncements.

7. It is further submitted that criminal history of seven cases have been explained in paragraph 19 of the affidavit and in all the cases the appellant is on bail, which has not been disputed by learned AGA.

8. Thus, indulgence of this Court is required and as such, the appellant, who is in jail since 18.01.2025 is entitled for bail and the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the appeal is liable to be allowed.

9. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of the appellant. However, he could not dispute the above contentions made by the appellant's counsel. 3 CRLA No. 973 of 2025

10. Considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant-applicant, learned A.G.A., and gone through the contents of the appeal, impugned order, F.I.R., and copies of bail orders in respect of the appellant.

11. Upon due consideration of above facts and circumstances including the statement of the complainant and the appellant has already been enlarged on bail in cases indicated in paragraph 19 of the affidavit as also the period of incarceration since

18.01.2025 also keeping in view the fact that the trial of the case is not likely to be concluded in near future, this Court is of the view that the appeal has substance and it is accordingly, allowed.

12. Order dated 04.03.2025 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Ambedkar Nagar in Bail Application No. 245 of 2025 arising out of Case Crime No. 247 of 2024, under Sections 406, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3(2)V, 3(2)VA,(1)da, dha of Act of 1989, P.S. Alapur, District - Ambedkar Nagar is set aside.

13. Let appellant Manoj Goswami, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions :- (i) The appellant will cooperate with the prosecution during trial. (ii) The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during trial. (iii) The appellant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(es). (iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence. (v) The appellant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. 4 CRLA No. 973 of 2025 (vi) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through counsel. (vii) The appellant will not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. (viii) The appellant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C./Section 351 BNSS.

14. In case of default of above conditions, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law

15. As this order relates to enlargement of the appellant on bail, it is clarified that observations made in this order shall have no bearing on the merits of the case and the trial court shall not be influenced by any observation made in this order. September 22, 2025 Mohit Singh/- (Saurabh Lavania,J.) MOHIT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

orders would be passed in the case in first call.", this Court proceeded to hear the instant appeal.

3. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and Shri Badrul Hasan, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent.

4. The present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989 (in short "Act of 1989") against the impugned order dated 04.03.2025 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Ambedkar Nagar in Bail Application No. 245 of 2025 arising out of Case Crime No. 247 of 2024, under Sections 406, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3(2)V, 3(2)VA,(1)da, dha of Act of 1989, P.S. Alapur, 2 District - Ambedkar Nagar. CRLA No. 973 of 2025

5. Pressing the present appeal and impeaching the order, under appeal, dated 04.03.2025, it is stated that an amount to the tune of Rs. 3,50,000 was to be provided to the informant and in this regard a cheque dated 24.03.2018 of Rs. 1,80,000 was provided, which was bounced, and thereafter the FIR in issue was lodged on 26.10.2024 at Police Station - Alapur, District Ambedkar Nagar, registered as FIR No. 0247/2024, wherein various allegations have been levelled to attract offence under Sections 406, 419, 420, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3(1)da, dha and 3(2)(va) of Act of 1989. According to this FIR, the appellant duped respondent no.2 on the pretext of providing a service, and in this regard, a forged appointment letter was also provided by the appellant to the respondent no.2, which in fact is not correct, and the allegations levelled in the FIR are subject to the evidence adduced by the parties before the trial court.

6. It is stated that, in fact, to a commercial dispute, particularly a dispute related to a cheque which was bounced, has been converted into a criminal dispute by making various allegations, which practice has been deprecated by the Hon'ble Apex Court in various pronouncements.

7. It is further submitted that criminal history of seven cases have been explained in paragraph 19 of the affidavit and in all the cases the appellant is on bail, which has not been disputed by learned AGA.

8. Thus, indulgence of this Court is required and as such, the appellant, who is in jail since 18.01.2025 is entitled for bail and the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the appeal is liable to be allowed.

9. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of the appellant. However, he could not dispute the above contentions made by the appellant's counsel. 3 CRLA No. 973 of 2025

10. Considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant-applicant, learned A.G.A., and gone through the contents of the appeal, impugned order, F.I.R., and copies of bail orders in respect of the appellant.

11. Upon due consideration of above facts and circumstances including the statement of the complainant and the appellant has already been enlarged on bail in cases indicated in paragraph 19 of the affidavit as also the period of incarceration since

18.01.2025 also keeping in view the fact that the trial of the case is not likely to be concluded in near future, this Court is of the view that the appeal has substance and it is accordingly, allowed.

12. Order dated 04.03.2025 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Ambedkar Nagar in Bail Application No. 245 of 2025 arising out of Case Crime No. 247 of 2024, under Sections 406, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3(2)V, 3(2)VA,(1)da, dha of Act of 1989, P.S. Alapur, District - Ambedkar Nagar is set aside.

13. Let appellant Manoj Goswami, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions :- (i) The appellant will cooperate with the prosecution during trial. (ii) The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during trial. (iii) The appellant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(es). (iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence. (v) The appellant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. 4 CRLA No. 973 of 2025 (vi) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through counsel. (vii) The appellant will not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. (viii) The appellant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C./Section 351 BNSS.

14. In case of default of above conditions, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law

15. As this order relates to enlargement of the appellant on bail, it is clarified that observations made in this order shall have no bearing on the merits of the case and the trial court shall not be influenced by any observation made in this order. September 22, 2025 Mohit Singh/- (Saurabh Lavania,J.) MOHIT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench